Starting to question the +/- 8 level dynamic

[Lazortag]

Surely it's dumb when a level 10 player griefs a level 2 player, but that should be a reason for the community to police this kind of douchey behaviour, not a reason to come up with some overly complicated system just to prevent this.

I'll play along no matter what system is adopted, but I think +/- 8 is still the best.

[tbox]

2 suggestions

1) make it 4/4 from lvl 1-20 and 20-40 6/6 40-50 8/8

2) make it so there is no coin loot if between more then 4 lvls above victim until lvl 30.


Do we want lvl 10's ganking lvl 3 people who are just trying to buy their first spells but cant because they get ganked over and over?

[Yukahwa]

Anything is better than present. I think it should be 4 levels to 30 if not 40.

[Softcore PK]

Originally Posted by Lazortag [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Surely it's dumb when a level 10 player griefs a level 2 player, but that should be a reason for the community to police this kind of douchey behaviour, not a reason to come up with some overly complicated system just to prevent this.

I'll play along no matter what system is adopted, but I think +/- 8 is still the best.

this

[Macken]

When i hit lvl 6, i fully intend to kill level 50's or 60s.

I wish anyone being selfish to suggest that i should not be allowed to do this, would consider my feelings.

[Morninx]

Originally Posted by Macken [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

When i hit lvl 6, i fully intend to kill level 50's or 60s.

I wish anyone being selfish to suggest that i should not be allowed to do this, would consider my feelings.

second that.. FFA for the win

[gloinz]

Originally Posted by Lazortag [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Surely it's dumb when a level 10 player griefs a level 2 player, but that should be a reason for the community to police this kind of douchey behaviour, not a reason to come up with some overly complicated system just to prevent this.

I'll play along no matter what system is adopted, but I think +/- 8 is still the best.

this

even though you are against training and using the same reason training should be allowed for why 8 levels should be allowed

[Sorath]

Make pvp ffa and start at level 1 with no safe zones , solves all

[ScaryBadAssholes]

OOR healing is an issue with ANY level restricted pvp.

Anything LESS than 8 levels ensures that people/guilds will frequently have OOR healers present; healers that are almost equal in level to the OOR combatants.

[Harrison]

Originally Posted by ScaryBadAssholes [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

OOR healing is an issue with ANY level restricted pvp.

Anything LESS than 8 levels ensures that people/guilds will frequently have OOR healers present; healers that are almost equal in level to the OOR combatants.

The dynamic system, when properly done, will deter this. So using it as a reason to not have properly implemented level ranges is not a good argument.

The most sensible way to ensure pvp health(which is very obviously vastly different than it ever was on live because of the manner in which you can already see this "community" handles itself) would be to put in the tiered 4 beginning, 6 mid, and then 8 end-game range.

The people who want FFA, no level range, etc. are just trolling so they can grief. They are terrible and we all know it.